>Overproduction of food
At a local level. not even close at a global level. and even if we did, the even distribution of resources across the world is neigh impossible.
>Overproduction of energy
probably true. but again, distribution is an issue, and the sustainability of this is questionable even with renewable resources, especially if you're pushing for a "not-everybody-has-to-work" model. Again, it's also location dependent.
>We also have things like public libraries, so the people wouldn't get to bored.
No. we have the internet where people masturbate. that's all they would do and you know it. at which point they are truly useless. no self improvement, no benefit for society.
all of this begs the question - why would the working majority ever tolerate this model? given that, even with adequate food production, there would never be even distribution, there would inevitably be animosity between the "worker" class and the "masturbator" class, which would lead to strife and warfare.
so, to summarize a bit, everyone would need to work, for the image of it if nothing else, or the ones who didn't would be killed or forced to work anyway.
I'm sounding a bit communist here, and that's sort of the point - the communism/socialism circlejerk you seem to subscribe to is, at it's roots, ruthlessly utilitarian in every-form, real or ideal, so I'm not sure where all of NEET's get off trying to justify your no-work lifestyles using these ideologies.